I have a bizarre, but valid idea that I want to run by the forum members . . . and please be patient with me as I build my argument.

A liger is a cross between a tiger and a lion, and while tigers and lions may top off at 450 pounds in extreme cases, a liger can weigh in at well over 900 pounds. This is because the genes that tell a tiger to stop growing come from the male, and the genes that tell a lion to stop growing in a lion come from the female, so if a male lion is mated with a female tiger, the liger doesn't have the genes that tell it to stop growing, and thus reaches an enormous size.

Here in Florida, we have a problem with introduced species of snakes from all over the world. Burmese pythons have been in the news lately as an example, but we also have African rock pythons, reticulated pythons, boa constrictors, and possibly (although this is unconfirmed, so one should be--ahem--skeptical) the green anaconda.

Is it possible that two different species of snakes from vastly different parts of the world could hybridize and create a truly giant snake in the same manner that hybridizing a lion and tiger creates a giant cat?

Plausible and likely are two different questions, though. Without knowing how it could occur, any conclusion would be premature; but invoking an argument from ignorance to support the mere possibility of something occurring isn't much of an argument.

I've heard "Isn't it possible...?" so many times while flipping past Ancient Aliens reruns that I usually just say "no" and move on.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.Asking: What is the most good for the most people?Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Why that is an excellent idea. That would be the first thing I'd look into, fer shure.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.Asking: What is the most good for the most people?Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

I realize that not all constricting snakes are members of the same family, but anacondas and boas are, and reticulated pythons, Burmese pythons, and African rock pythons are, and I know that all of these species are free and breeding in Florida (with the exception of suspected--but unconfirmed--anacondas).

I remember when both the green anaconda and the smaller yellow anaconda were sold with impunity in pet stores all over the state.

So, I do believe that here--in Florida--different species of snakes would have a chance to encounter each other in a way that would never happen in their native habitats.

As to the idea about how the genetics with regard to size would sort themselves out in such snake hybrids, I have no idea.

I did find other examples of hybridization causing changes in size. A hybrid between a leopard and a puma actually creates a dwarf animal less than half the size of either parent. There are other examples involving birds (the catalina macaw), canines, and lizards.

Maybe the cryptozoology people aren't as wrong as we think they are when it comes to certain things.

The size of an animal is not only determined by its genes - there are purely physical constraints. What goes for lungs in a snake, for example, are rather small for animals their size. If a snake gets too big it will become very difficult to keep the blood oxygenated.Next is nutrition: since snakes eat their prey whole, they have to regurgitate the non-edible bits, i.e. bones. This usually means that a snake has to fully digest one animal before it can eat the next. The bigger the snake the bigger the prey needs to be to provide enough sustenance.

I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:

Spoiler:

1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.- Douglas Adams

KevinLevites wrote:Maybe such a hybrid is responsible for reports of giant snakes that defy any current world record?

The first question should be -- how good are these reports?

If it's like the standard Bigfoot & Nessie stuff we get here all the time, then I would not bother looking for any explanations other than fakes and mistakes.

As far as tales of giant snakes are concerned, the only one that I ever found interesting was the famous Belgian Congo pilot's report from 1959. He estimated the snake he saw at 50 feet. That is about twice the size of the longest verified specimen. He took a picture, which was discounted due to lacking anything by which to measure scale. Then later someone spotted what looks like termite mounds in the upper part of the photo, which gives it some credence. Still, it's a one-off. No further reports of the snake ever materialized.

Bart Stewart wrote:As far as tales of giant snakes are concerned, the only one that I ever found interesting was the famous Belgian Congo pilot's report from 1959. He estimated the snake he saw at 50 feet. That is about twice the size of the longest verified specimen. He took a picture, which was discounted due to lacking anything by which to measure scale. Then later someone spotted what looks like termite mounds in the upper part of the photo, which gives it some credence.

I'm a little bit dubious about this one. Firstly the pilot estimated the snake as being 200 feet long, not 50 feet.

Secondly, they "measure the shadows on the anthills" but that only works if you know the height of the anthill and the time of day.

Thirdly, the anthill causes shadows, but the giant snake does not! Also, If you look at the snakes tail, the light source appears to be coming from a different direction.

giant snake.jpg

Giant snake 2.jpg

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Bart Stewart wrote:On the video I posted the pilot is talking about it, and he said he felt it was "almost 50 feet long."

I can't see the shadow problem you mentioned, but that's a pretty grainy photo.

"He circled around for a better look and had one of his flight crew take a series of photographs"Where are the other photos?

Firstly, the snake is a cylinder. If the light is coming from the north, to allow the anthills to be measured, then the snake should reflect the same same light source on its tail......but it doesn't and doesn't even have a shadow.

Thirdly, if an 18 foot (6 metres) long snake weighs 100 kilos, a 200 foot long snake would weigh, 3.35 metric tones. That's getting out of the range of possibility, as it could not find enough protein to live on, nor move its own body weight. We then get into the obvious question about its offspring and "where in the hell" was this meant to be in Kamina in the Congo?

The only weird thing about this is that Kamina was a base for fighting Katanga insurgents in the Belgium Congo wars and was closed in 1960, a year after he spotted the snake. This is the same place that mercenaries fought that you may remember from "The Wild Geese". That was all over by 1962 and yet no one has had a look for the snake in this location.

TJrandom wrote:I`d put that snake at about 18 feet - since I have never encountered cracked earth with major cracks over a foot apart. It could be half of that.

To put it in perspective (hehe), apparently it doesn't even get that big:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_brown_snake wrote:This species has an average total length (including tail) of 1.1–1.8 m (3.6–5.9 ft). The maximum recorded size for the species is 2.4 m (7.9 ft), although any specimen of greater than 2 m (6.6 ft) in total length would be considered exceptionally large.[5]

The one in the video looks like in many pics of various black snakes I've seen...

Matthew Ellard wrote:"He circled around for a better look and had one of his flight crew take a series of photographs"Where are the other photos?

Firstly, the snake is a cylinder. If the light is coming from the north, to allow the anthills to be measured, then the snake should reflect the same same light source on its tail......but it doesn't and doesn't even have a shadow.

[color=#000080]Thirdly, if an 18 foot (6 metres) long snake weighs 100 kilos, a 200 foot long snake would weigh, 3.35 metric tones. That's getting out of the range of possibility, as it could not find enough protein to live on, nor move its own body weight.

The video I posted has the pilot, Remy Van Lierde, saying the snake was "almost" 50 feet long. He also says they only snapped one photograph of it. This other video you posted has some Youtube guy estimating 200 feet (which I agree is ridiculous) and saying there was a series of photographs. That was not the original information.

The termite mounds cannot be measured for size. They could be small; there's no way of knowing.

Bart Stewart wrote:The video I posted has the pilot, Remy Van Lierde, saying the snake was "almost" 50 feet long. He also says they only snapped one photograph of it. This other video you posted has some Youtube guy estimating 200 feet (which I agree is ridiculous) and saying there was a series of photographs. That was not the original information.

He does state he made six passes and some bloke, whose name we don't know, in the back of the plane took the one photo. That seemed a little odd. At the end of the video Arthur C Clarke says the sake was close to 40 feet long, not 50 feet, which is also strange.

Firstly, I don't know why were are giving weight to the pilots size of estimate, when we can see the photo and there is nothing to estimate the size of the snake to.

Bart Stewart wrote:To me the graininess of the photo includes the snake itself.

I still have a big problem with the light source on that photo as the snake does not match the environment and does not cast a shadow. In the 1950s you used a sharp knife and an airbrush to fake photos and you could not fake texture. The photo has this feel.

But why would military people on a military mission fake a photo of a somewhat large snake, that may be a new species of interest in a disputed area of land about to fall to the enemy? It reminds me of Colonel TE Lawrence's mission studying archaeological discoveries in Arabia and Syria, that happened to be near Ottoman military rail construction, just before WW1.

Matthew Ellard wrote:But why would military people on a military mission fake a photo of a somewhat large snake, that may be a new species of interest in a disputed area of land about to fall to the enemy? It reminds me of Colonel TE Lawrence's mission studying archaeological discoveries in Arabia and Syria, that happened to be near Ottoman military rail construction, just before WW1.

It should be the other way around. it should be serpentologists accidentally photographing a secret military installation. Then we could be guessing from the shadows how big it was.

. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

Matthew Ellard wrote:But why would military people on a military mission fake a photo of a somewhat large snake, that may be a new species of interest in a disputed area of land about to fall to the enemy? It reminds me of Colonel TE Lawrence's mission studying archaeological discoveries in Arabia and Syria, that happened to be near Ottoman military rail construction, just before WW1.

It should be the other way around. it should be serpentologists accidentally photographing a secret military installation infestation. Then we could be guessing from the shadows how big it was.

The article does contain a typo, where it says authorities are warning the public about a 10 foot snake. The original report said 100 foot.

Every single report I can find says 10 feet or 'in excess of' 10 feet. What makes you think they're all misprints?

I was kidding (back in August.)

Now, as for truly giant snakes, this one is not quite as big as what the Belgian pilot claimed he saw, but here we have the recent discovery of what is claimed to be a 10 meter, 400 kg anaconda in Brazil. Possibly worthy of that subjective term monster. At the very least it makes you wonder what may yet be out there.

Not sure why that Guinness link didn't work. It works when I go there apart from this board! I'll post it again, but if you Google world's biggest snake, and you scroll down past the links about Trump's EPA administrator, you will come to a Guinness Book link about Medusa the python.

Bart Stewart wrote:Not sure why that Guinness link didn't work. It works when I go there apart from this board! I'll post it again, but if you Google world's biggest snake, and you scroll down past the links about Trump's EPA administrator, you will come to a Guinness Book link about Medusa the python.